On 7/2/25 3:57 AM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
On 7/1/25 07:29, Bart Van Assche wrote:
diff --git a/block/blk-settings.c b/block/blk-settings.c
index a000daafbfb4..bceb9a9cb5ba 100644
--- a/block/blk-settings.c
+++ b/block/blk-settings.c
@@ -814,6 +814,8 @@ int blk_stack_limits(struct queue_limits *t, struct queue_limits *b,
}
t->max_secure_erase_sectors = min_not_zero(t->max_secure_erase_sectors,
b->max_secure_erase_sectors);
+ t->driver_preserves_write_order = t->driver_preserves_write_order &&
+ b->driver_preserves_write_order;
Why not use a feature instead ? Stacking of the features does exactly this, no ?
That would be less code and one less limit.
Hi Damien,
Thanks for the feedback. I will look into making this change.
Please also help with reviewing the other patches in this series.
Progress on this patch series has been slow so far because every time I
post this patch series reviewer feedback is provided on less than 10% of
the code in this patch series.
Thanks,
Bart.
